[rabbitmq-discuss] Alternative to "immediate" in RabbitMQ 3.x
stuff at moesel.net
Mon Oct 21 20:52:23 BST 2013
We have a perfect use case for the immediate flag now, but just discovered
it was deprecated in RabbitMQ 3.x. Oops.
We considered the suggested alternative of using a message TTL of 0 and
dead-letter exchanges, but ran into these two issues:
- If x-message-ttl is set to 0 on the queue, then what *should be* a
message-specific option now effects every message on the queue. This isn't
acceptable for us.
- If expiration is set to 0 on a message, the message will not be
dead-lettered until it gets to the head of the queue (which could be a *
We need to support scenarios where the publisher chooses on a
message-by-message basis if the message should be "immediate".
The best I can come up with is splitting every queue into two queues now--
one that has x-message-ttl set to 0 and one that doesn't, and each consumer
would need to consume from *both* queues. And publishers would need to
specify different routing keys based on if they want "immediate" or not...
I don't really like this idea much.
Question #1: Is there some other way of doing it that I'm not thinking of?
Question #2: Has there been any thought to supporting "immediate" again?
Or is it definitely a thing of the past?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss